Uganda Case Law

Nyakecho v Electoral Commission and Another

Nyakecho v Electoral Commission and Another (Election Petition Appeal No. 14 of 2021) [2022] UGCA 158 (1 June 2022)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Election Petition Appeal No. 14 of 2021

Judge

Luswata, JA

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge erred in admitting and relying on the Chief Registrar's letter regarding the status of the commissioner for oaths without proper evidentiary procedure and without affording the appellant an opportunity to rebut its authenticity. The letter was not properly introduced into evidence, lacked certification, and its authenticity was contested. The court held that this violated principles of natural justice and rendered the decision void. Furthermore, the court clarified that the remedial provisions of Section 14A of the Advocates Act do not apply to a…

Source excerpt

• Affidavit Validity
• Commissioner For Oaths
• Practicing Certificate Requirements
• Natural Justice
• Costs Award
• Remedial Legislation

Registered Trustees of Kampala Institute v Departed Asians Property Board

Registered Trustees of Kampala Institute v Departed Asians Property Board [1994] UGSC 18 (1 August 1994)

Court

Supreme Court of Uganda

The Supreme Court held that Uganda’s Expropriated Properties Act applied to property taken over by the Military Regime even if the takeover was unlawful, and allowed the appeal.

• Expropriated Properties Act Interpretation
• Repossession Of Expropriated Property
• Statutory Construction
• Remedial Legislation
• Lease Expiry And Continuation
• Expropriated-properties-act

Registered Trustees of Kampala Institute v Departed Asians property Custodian Board

Registered Trustees of Kampala Institute v Departed Asians property Custodian Board (Civil Appeal 21 of 93) [1994] UGSC 47 (1 August 1994)

Court

Supreme Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Appeal 21 of 93

Judge

Wambuzi, CJ, Odoki, JSC, Platt, JSC

The Supreme Court held that the Expropriated Properties Act, 1982 is a remedial statute intended to address the wrongful deprivation of property by the Military Regime between 1971 and 1979. Section 1(1)(c) of the Act must be given its ordinary and liberal meaning, covering any property appropriated or taken over by the Military Regime, regardless of whether the taking was lawful or unlawful. The Court rejected the restrictive interpretation that would limit the Act's application only to lawfully appropriated property, finding that such an approach would perpetuate the injustice the Act was m…

Source excerpt

• Expropriated Properties Act
• Repossession Of Property
• Statutory Interpretation
• Remedial Legislation
• Lease Expiry
• Government Appropriation